COLONIAL PREMIERS IN ENGLAND.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13894, 4 May 1907, Page 9

COLONIAL PREMIERS IN ENGLAND.

DISCUSSION ON PREFERENTIAL TRADE. DR JAMESON'S VIEWS. SPEECH HY THE CHANCELLOR OF Til 13 EXCHEQUER. FISCAL PREFERENCE REFUSED. Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. LONDON, May 2. Dr Jameson (Cape Colony), in the course of a clever speech at the Colonial Conference on the question of preferential trade, endorsed tVevy word that Mr Deakin had eaid. The colonies were rips for action, and all were awaiting tho British Government's d ec i s ' on ' The colonies had not asked Great Britain to' sacrifice her fiscal principles, but had asked her to change the methods ehc adopted, and to practise the principle of preference, if only by reducing existing duties. He dwelt on the great advantage that would accrue to South Africa if tho duties on tobacco and wine were reduced, and emphasised the statement- that the two territories in South Africa which were absolutely under the control of tho British Government had been directed to adhere to the Customs Union of South Africa, which gave preference to the Motherland, Ho hoped that that indicated the possibility of another advance, lie mentioned tlmt a, minority in the Cape Parliament opposed any further preference, and, possibly, wcro opposed to even the continuance of the present preference unless Groat Britain was prepared to givo them reciprocity to some small extent.

Air Moor (Natal) urged an experimental reduction in the duty on tobacco.

Mr Asquith (Chancellor of the Ex chequer), replying to the arguments ad vanccd, point-blank refused any fiscal pre ference, but indicated vaguely the possi bility of assisting closer relations b; means of steam lines and cables.

Mr Deakin asked Mr Asquith whether he meant to exclude consideration of the proposals of Mr Hofmeycr and Sir Sydenham Clarke, which involved neither Protection nor Freetrade.

Mr Asquith asked for time to consider.

Sir W. J. Lyno dissented from. Mr Asquith's views. From its foundation to its summit .Mr Asquith's pronouncement was, said Sir W. Lyne, calculated to

lessen the sympathies of tin colonies. He resented Mr Asquith's attempts to belittle the value of the pieieiences at present conceded. THE REPRESENTATIVE OF INDIA. LONDON, May 3. (Received May 3, at 9.2 Pjin.) Sir James Mackay, speaking on behalf of India, regretted being at variance with the representatives of tlie autonomous colonies, though the Indian Government tried to regard preference from the Imperial as well as from the Indian standpoint. Under the existing system India enjoyed a highly advantageous position. Her external sea-borne trade had increased 66 per cent, in a decade. Some of her best customers were the protected countries of Emope, without whoso markets sho would be unable to dispose of her produce. If India kept outside preference foreigners might treat her separately, but otherwise they might retaliate and thus injure Indian trade. India had nothing to gain by the Empire adopting a system of tariffs discriminating against foreign manufactured products and foodstuffs. ■ The risks of sacrifices involved were too great for India to acoept. Any preference granted to the United Kingdom by the autonomous colonies ought also to lie granted to India. MR BOTHA'S VIEWS. Mr Botha said personally he favoured preference, buHiad not been long enough in ofiice to get a mandate from the Transvaal. Therefore he adhered to the resolution of 1902. SPEECH BY MR ASQUITH. Mr Asqiiitli said he acknowledged the ability and clearness of the colonial case presented, and complimented Mr Dcakiu on his able exposition. Ho gladly noticed that nothing had been said calculated to weaken the sense of Imperial unity or the determination to cement that unity. He dw-elt on the great advantage of discussing such subjects face to face. Sir W. Laurier had often emphasised .that the basis of unity must be the Tight of each member of the Empire to first regard its own interests.

LESSON OF AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE (Received Hay 3, at 10.40 p.m.)

Mr Asquith went, on to say that the eEseiitial characteristic of the Empire was that, it combined loyal attachment to each other with the completest freedom of selfgovernment. British statesmen had never forgott-en tho lesson of American Independence, and tliey would not attemptagain to force a fiscal policy on a reluctantpossession. The colonies were granted full fiscal independence, and had even used it to build up tariff walls against the Motherland. If the colonics desired to foster their industries by protective tariffs their action would not evoke remonstrance or criticism from him. Some had given preference to the Motherland, but did not admit the Motherland's nianii- j facturers to compete on equal terms with those of local producers. Doubtless the colonies held that this was vital to their interests. Similarly the British Government held that Freetrade was vital to British interests, even more so than in l'eet's day. livil ain's population ot 41,000,000 was bearing an enormous debt, also tho cost- of Imperial diplomacy ami defence. The population was dependent for their food and raw materials on external sources of supply. Britain maintained her supremacy owing to her special productive activity. The profits obtained from the biggest open market of the world and the enormous earnings of tho shipping were all based on keeping food and raw materials on the same basis ana at as nearly as possible the same price. FREETRADE. Freetrade was no shibboleth, but a principle of vital national interest. After an elaborate tariff reform campaign, tho British people had declared in favour of Freetrade by a majority of unexampled size. The British Government was linkable to accept- any infringement of that policy, even by the adoption of Dr Jameson's idea of experimental reductions on tobacco and wine. Replying to Mr Deakin's complaint that they were excluded from foreign markets by hostile tariffs, Mr Asquith declared that Britain practically everywhere enjoyed the most-favoured-nation treatment and stood in a better position in protected markets than did the nations under tho protective system. Next to India and Ceylon, Germany was the best market abroad for the products of the United Kingdom. '1 hough the volume of British trade had largely increased the proportion as between the colonies and foreign countries remained practically constant. He admitted that the South African preference was very liberal, but it- was too early to judge of its effect on British trade. Canada's tariff benefited British trado

rather by stopping the decrease than by actual. increase. Canadian manufacturers remained protected. Taking 1111 average on all goods—dutiable, free, and ad valorem—the rate for the United Kingdom's goods was 19 per cent, and for the United States 13 per cent. THE AUSTRALIAN PROPOSAL. (Received May 3, at 11.17 p.m.) Mr Asquith said the Australian proposal only applitd 8 per cent, to tlm United Kingdom's products, and that- the maximum profit to the, British exporter would not exceed £100,000.

Mr Deakin and Sir W. Lyne interjected hat this was only an instalment.

Mr Afifpiith replied: " Perhaps so," but he was dealing with facts. Preference was only given, on goods in British ships in order to ensure while labour. This was a serious consideration, involving a policy the British Government must deprecate. He had l tint- intended to criticise. He only wished to show the difficulties in the way of offering a preferential tariff advantageous to Britain where there was a system of Protection. In a Freetrade country where duties were levied for revenue only the difficulties would be much greater. Mr Asquith complimented Sir J. Ward on his able and powerful advocacy of preference. He thought some of his suggestions valuable. Mr Asquitli remarked that. New Zealand's preference covered only 20 per cent, of the import trade; besides, it (lid not lower the duties, but raised them against the foreigner. Britain at present offered the freest, possible market. Preferential tariffs involved giving less to other people and not more to the colonies. They involved setting tip a system of new duties wfiicii would infringe'the root principles of Freetrade, On a question of principle there was no possibility of such compromises as some suggested. Mr Asquith proceeded: "Consider on what preference must be given, if given at all. In 1905 Britain imported from the colonies £5,500,000, representing articles wholly or partly manufactured; £32,500,000, representing raw materials; and £27,750,000 on food 1 , drink, and tobacco. Preference, to be valuable, must be in rcspcct to raw materials. If such were granted, the very citadel of Freetrade would bo attacked. The sources of supply would be restricted, and prices would lie raised. The Government and people of England -accepted that view, and therefore were unable to ( accept the principle of preferential trade by tariff preference." OTHER SUGGESTIONS. Tho discussion had thrown light on the other methods of improving inter-Imperial trade. He especially referred to Sir Joseph Ward's suggestions for the improvement of the means of communication, especially by steam services, and by an increase in tho number of commercial agents in the colonics; also the feivability of removing or reducing the Suez Canal dues, and establishing a fast mail line to Australasia, via Canada. On all these matters the British Government was fully ready to consider how best to co-operate in any practical proposal. He said this the more earnestly as he had felt it necessary to enunciate a general policy not in accord with the views of the colonies.

The conference generally considered that Mr Asquith delivered an exceptionally clear, cogent, and powerful speech from the standpoint of abstract Freetrade.

REMARKS BY SIR J. G. WARD, (Received May 4, at 0.31 a.m.)

Sir J. G. Ward said he was not surprised at the Government's general attitude, nor had ho challenged Britain's right to adhere to wlmtcvcr policy she considered best suited to her circumstances, but he had hoped that the Government might have scon its way to give preference in regard to a few special articles like wheat, meat, and dairy produce, sinco active colonial competition would have kept priccs as low as at present. He, thought that such a policy of specialising would be quite consistent with the principle of Freetrade. While he was disappointed at the fact that nothing had been doite in the direction of establishing preference, he was pleased at the prospects regarding the Suez Canal charges and the providing of a mail service which would place Australia within 15 days of London, and New Zealand within 20 days. Those benefits were of considerable importance.

INADEQUATE REPORTS OP THE DISCUSSIONS. LONDON, May 2. The Premiers are incensed at the ludicrous inadequacy and inaccuracy of the preck of their discussions prepared for publication. The pms evinces extraordinary interest, and clamours for further publicity. Sir If. Canipbell-Bannerau'.n, in the House of Commons, hinted that n full report ivouhl bs published after ttic conference; certainly no preferential treatment would be extended to one subject over .mother. So far as the Government ,Avas concerned, lie Imped that every syllable would be published. TARIFF RKFORM. LONDON, May 2. The Premiers are receiving many hundreds of tariff reform resolutions from all over the country. The Freetrade leagues declare tUey could do the same if they chose.

THE VICTORIA LEAGUE. LONDON, May 2. The Victoria League (Lady Jersey presiding) presented the colonial Premiers at the Imperial Institute with an address of welcome, signtd by 12ut) members. Mr Deakin, in acknowledging the address, referred humorously to the interference with the conference by tho banqueting and gaieties, which satirists might almost have supposed to have been carefully planned with a view to distracting the'm from the business of the Kmpire or preventing a better understanding. He added, in a half-cheerv vein: "Despite such surroundings we are not to be crushed.—(Cheers.) If we seek in vain sometimes in official circles for sympathy and assistance, for the helping hand extended to us in our remote countries, and for that action which is all-important at the centre, we can at least look to the leagues and voluntary organisations of citizens to Jill the place that official circles are inclined to leave empty.—(Cheers.) The league wouid receive the cordial thanks of tho people of the outer empire. If you receive less than your meed of recognition here—if the cold shoulder is turned to the league, as it is to usremember that there is a warm hand on the other side of the globe grasping yours. After all, this country was created as much without its Governments, sometimes despito its Governments, as with them.'' Sir Joseph Ward, who was equally applauded, referred to the teaching of tho Empire's history to New Zealand girls and boys and to the use of the rifle in their schools. Mr -Winston Churchill had started to attend the function, but- wrote regretting that he had been recalled to tho Colonial Ollice on urgent business.

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BANQUET.

LONDON, May 2.

At- the Chamber ot Conimcrcc banquet to tlie colonial Premiers'3oo persons were present. Sir Joseph Ward, replying to the toast "The Parliaments of the Empire," f.aid

that every great national community should have a voice in the management of the Kmpire. "Is it not," lie asked,

"worth impressing those who do not sco eve to evo with us on preference? Wo should carefully consider the possibilities and potentialities of our great Kmpire."

Mr Deakin, replying to tho toast "The Consolidation of the Kmpire,'' promised the members of the Chamber of Commerce the heartiest- welcome in Australia in 1509. The voyage would soon dispel any apprehension us to Australian sentiment and sympathy with tlie Motherland. "Trade," lie said, "has made tho Empire, and trade must continue to maintain it, therefore the voice of the trader should lv the first to receive publio attention. Can you not trust yourselves to make bargains with your own kin?" AUSTRAL CLUB'S UKCLI'TION. LONDON, May 2. Nearly one thousand persons were present at. the Austral Club's reception to tho Premiers. VIEWS OF MR RAMSAY MACDONALD, LONDON, May 2. Mr Ramsay Macdonald, M.l'., in a letter to The Times, ridicules the puny benefit which Australian preference would concede to Great Britain. If Great Britain accepted it 6ho would penalise Canada and New' Zealand and India as much as if they wero foreign States.